302 FEDERAL REPORTER. �P. W. Brocksieper was in the employment of Peck & Walter, the Peck & Walter Manufacturing Company, and J. B. Sargent & Co., the predecessors of the defendant in New Britain, between 1849 and 1859, as the foreman in the ornamental department of their work, and is now a contractor in the defendant's factory in New Haven. He did the class of work hereafter described between 1856 and 1859, in New Britain, but the work of which I speak particularly was done after 1857, in a newkiln made underthe superintendence of Mr. Geb- hard, the head painter of the establishment, for the purpose of fur- nishing a very high beat. Brocksieper treated hat-hooks, coat-hooks, jamb-hooks, sash-fasteners, match-boxes, looking-glass frames, and cast-iron horses for saddler's Windows in the following way : �" We had the castings cast with a facing, so as to corne eut of the sand very nearly entirely free of sand ; then those castings rolled, drilled, and counter- sunlc, the highest parts or the protninent parts of the ornaments brigh tened with sand-paper or emery-paper, brushed clean from dust, then sized and baked. In order to handle threm easy, those hooks, we had them fastened on a block with a spring, and sized them in quantities as they were ordered, let them stand long enough so that the size would not stick to the Angers, then we put them in pans, or on hooks, and put them in the kiln to bake." �The size was a mixture of eqaal parts of tarpentine, copal varnish, and linseed oil, and was applied in a very thin coat, put on with a stiff, fine brush as lightly as he could. The kiln was heated to 420 degrees Fahrenheit. Several batches of hooks of from 12 dozen to 24 dozen eaoh, between 100 dozen and 200 dozen sash-fasteners, about 100 looking-glass frames, and horses in "considerable quanti- ties," were made and sold. The match-boxes were probably made in larger quantities. �It is manifest that this style of ornamentation did not become a marked feature of the defendant's business. It was not caught up as an attractive style by their customers, though Brocksieper was much pleased with it, and did what he could to press it upon the attention of his employers. While there is no doubt that the repro- ductions of this method of coloring, which were made by Mr. Euff under the eye of the examiner, are Tucker bronze, I do not think that the articles which were made in 1857 were precisely of the same char- acter, for if they had been they would have received the prompt attention of the public. �The plaintiff says that they were not made by his process for two reasons : First, that there is no evidence that the iron was oxidized by the beat, which is an essential part of his process. Ail the testi- mony in regard to the manner of manufacture shows that the iron ��� �
